Energy Functionals: Gradient Expansions and Beyond

  • D. J. W. Geldart
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSB, volume 337)


The determination of the ground state energy and the ground state electron density distribution of a many-electron system in a fixed external potential is a problem of major importance in condensed matter physics. For a given Hamiltonian and for specified boundary conditions, it is possible in principle to obtain directly numerical solutions of the the Schrodinger equation. Even with current generations of computers, this is feasible in practice only for systems of rather small total electron number. Of course, a variety of alternative methods, such as self-consistent mean field theories, also exist. However, these are approximate.


Density Functional Theory Ground State Energy Thermodynamic Limit Local Density Approximation Finite Temperature 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. B. 136, 864 (1964).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    W. Kohn and L.J. Sham, Phys. Rev. 140, A1133 (1965).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    N.D. Mermin, Phys. Rev. 137, A1441 (1965).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    W. Kohn and P. Vashishta, in Theory of the Inhomogeneous Electron Gas, edited by S. Lundqvist and N.H. March (Plenum, New York, 1983), p. 79.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    D. Pines and P. Nozieres, The Theory of Quantum Liquids, (Benjamin, New York, 1966).Google Scholar
  6. [7]
    D.J.W. Geldart and M. Rasolt, in The Single Particle Density in Physics and Chem istry, edited by N.H. March and B.M. Deb (Academic, London, 1987), p. 151.Google Scholar
  7. [8]
    D.J.W. Geldart and M. Rasolt, in Strongly Correlated Electron Systems, edited by M.P. Das and D. Neilson (Nova Science Publishers, New York, 1992).Google Scholar
  8. [9]
    K.G. Wilson and J. Kogut, Phys. Reports. 12, 75 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [10]
    S-K. Ma and K.A. Brueckner, Phys. Rev. 165, 18 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [11]
    L.J. Sham, in Computational Methods in Band Theory, edited by P.J. Marcus, J.F. Janak, and A.R. Williams (Plenum, New York, 1971), p. 458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [12]
    D.J.W. Geldart and M. Rasolt, Report submitted to the National Research Council of Canada (1972).Google Scholar
  12. [13]
    L. Kleinman, Phys. Rev. B. 10, 2221 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [14]
    D.J.W. Geldart. M. Rasolt, and CO. Ambladh, Sol. State Commun. 16, 243 (1975).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [15]
    M. Rasolt and D.J.W. Geldart, Phys. Rev. Lett. 35, 1234 (1975).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [16]
    D.J.W. Geldart and M. Rasolt, Phys. Rev. B. 13, 1477 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [17]
    It may be convenient to consider the entire system to be confined within a very large container having inpenetrable walls if realistic equilibrium of vapour and condensed phases is important. In cases of immediate interest, the true vapour phase is not an essential feature and the relatively small volume occupied by the condensed phase is the more important thermodynamical variable. There are still subtleties associated with taking the thermodynamic limit, particularly when isolating surface and bulk effects, but the problems with vanishing density of particles can be controlled.Google Scholar
  17. [18]
    D.J.W. Geldart and R. Taylor, Can. J. Phys. 48, 155 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [19]
    A.D. Becke, Phys. Rev. A. 38, 3098 (1988). References to other work aimed at providing generalizations of simple gradient expansions are also given in this work.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [20]
    D.J.W. Geldart, E. Dunlap, M.L. Glasser, and M.R.A. Shegelski, Sol. State Commun. 88, 81 (1993).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [21]
    E. Dunlap and D.J.W. Geldart, Can. J. Phys. 72, 1 (1994).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [22]
    M.L. Glasser, D.J.W. Geldart, and E. Dunlap, Can. J. Phys. 72, 7 (1994).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [23]
    M.R.A. Shegelski, D.J.W. Geldart, M.L. Glasser and D. Neilson, Can. J. Phys. 72, 14 (1994).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [24]
    J.A. Chevary and S.H. Vosko, Phys. Rev. B. 42, 5320 (1990). This paper also contains references to earlier numerical work.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [25]
    E. Engel and S.H. Vosko, Phys. Rev. B. 42, 4940 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [26]
    F. Herman, J.P. Van Dyke, and I.B. Ortenburger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 22, 807 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [27]
    A.M. Boring, Phys. Rev. B. 2, 1506 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [28]
    A.D. Becke, J. Chem. Phys. 84, 4524 (1986).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. J. W. Geldart
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysicsDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations